The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Lib here, support death penalty for white on black crime, take ?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:14 PM Author: khaki tank senate (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875219) |
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:16 PM Author: French Stain Stead Basic argument? Anything new? Or just an appeal to deterrence? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875232) |
 |
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:22 PM Author: khaki tank senate Deterrence is somewhat relevant, but the larger issue is that I think we need to manifest the fact that laws have been structured against minorities for so long by counter structuring most laws now. For example, legislators have made the penalty for crack (more often used by black and minority victims) far harsher than chemically identical cocaine more often used by whites. Eliminating the disparity is not sufficient to redress the many structural problems we have built into the "system" to tear down minorities. We should eliminate the distinction between crack and cocaine, but whites should receive about 1.5 times the sentence that a black person receives for the same quantity. Of course, the war on drugs has problems from the bottom up, so this is just a topical example. In actuality I believe most drugs should be legalized. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875285) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:24 PM Author: frozen dingle berry office Flame aside, this para merely supports making Crack and Cocaine punishment times the same. You fail to support the full 180 switch. This then applies to w on b crimes, make the punishment the same. Not worse... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875299) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:28 PM Author: khaki tank senate So do you think it would be fair to run a race where half of the runners are not permitted to wear shoes? Obviously not Then why would it be fair to make them run half the race barefoot, and midway through, after everyone else has a solid head start, tell them that everyone can put on shoes? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875312) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:29 PM Author: frozen dingle berry office lulz. I think a more accurate description would be for Race 1 one group ran barefoot, than 50 years later we can either allow both groups to run with shoes or deny the other group (made up of different people by now) shoes for Race 2. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875323) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:31 PM Author: khaki tank senate Well, you would be wrong. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875334) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:16 PM Author: Lime federal menage ladyboy And as for black on white crime? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875236) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:18 PM Author: khaki tank senate Absolutely not (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875249) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:21 PM Author: Lime federal menage ladyboy tyft (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875275) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:24 PM Author: khaki tank senate Most black on white crime is the result of structural inequalities that the powerful have built into a system that might allow escape for some disadvantaged people (such as poor white individuals) but for whom escape is impossible if you are compounded in the inequalities you face (i.e., poor African American teens in single parent households) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875295) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:26 PM Author: carmine keepsake machete athletic conference Ok, so what about white on white? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875311) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:28 PM Author: khaki tank senate No DP. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875314) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:28 PM Author: Arrogant Bronze Spot Mexican What's the rule for mulatto on black and white on mulatto? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875317) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:28 PM Author: Lime federal menage ladyboy So would you repeal all of the 14th amendment or only the parts necessary to allow a racist law like this to be constitutional? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875318) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:31 PM Author: khaki tank senate First, I don't think that it is so clear that these laws would be unconstitutional. As I said, the crack cocaine laws basically do this right now with only the thinnest patina of some "objective" distinction. But if actually required, obviously I would support a constitutional amendment to facilitate the necessary changes to our legal structure to reform our criminal laws. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875330) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:32 PM Author: Lime federal menage ladyboy Any facially racist law like this would be a per se violation of equal protection. It's not ambiguous when you say black on white gets X but white on black gets Y. Justification for differential treatment is irrelevant under the last 50 years of scotus precedent (ever since Korematsu was de facto overturned) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875335) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:33 PM Author: khaki tank senate Well, there is certainly some caselaw to support that as things stand now. I don't necessarily agree and I think that a honest assessment of a plan like mine along constitutional dimensions would yield different results, but that's a matter I'd have to discuss in a longer post. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875344) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:38 PM Author: Lime federal menage ladyboy so basically you havent thought your flame that through (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875377) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:39 PM Author: khaki tank senate Like I said it would require a much longer, multi paragraph post. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875383) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:31 PM Author: frozen dingle berry office Just let Soto "discover" the constitutionality of the law in our "living Constitution". (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875331) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:32 PM Author: glittery lay What about the other minorities? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875337) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:36 PM Author: khaki tank senate Most other minorities don't grow up in the kind of history of subregation, domination and contempt that black people do. However, a case can be made for, i.e., Mexican Americans who basically had their homeland raped and their homes stolen from them as part of the Manifest Destiny narrative we've seen from our elites over the last 300 years. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875366) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:33 PM Author: Bonkers Brilliant Legend Decent flame. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875346) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:34 PM Author: Arrogant Bronze Spot Mexican Could have been fun, but it was run by a tard. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875360) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:43 PM Author: Lime federal menage ladyboy cr. XO flames are just about goading people now rather than executing thoughtful, immersed flame. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875402) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:47 PM Author: frozen dingle berry office I would disagree. I think that there are two broad classes of flame and that they should be judged within their respective category. This flame falls into the over-the-top egregious, laughable category (notably inclusions here would be basically everything Johnsmeyer (sp) says). You cannot compare this category to the long, non-obvious flames. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875437) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 5:48 PM Author: Lime federal menage ladyboy right, but the point is that we are seeing fewer and fewer instances of the latter and marked increases of the former. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875452) |
|
Date: June 12th, 2012 6:16 PM Author: frozen dingle berry office fair. If that is your point I would agree. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1969214&forum_id=2#20875649) |